Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 97

Thread: Call Gov. McDonnell: New Law Would Eliminate CHP As Valid Voter ID

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Angry Call Gov. McDonnell: New Law Would Eliminate CHP As Valid Voter ID



    The new voter ID law would eliminate concealed carry permits as valid voter ID:

    http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp...131+ful+SB1256

    Governor McDonnell could line item veto this part of the law, or veto the law entirely.

    E-mail him:

    http://www.governor.virginia.gov/Abo...ctGovernor.cfm

    Or call him:

    Phone Numbers:

    Office: (804) 786-2211
    Fax: (804) 371-6351
    TTY/TDD (For the deaf or hard-of-hearing):
    1-800-828-1120, or 711


    Tell him: WE DON'T NEED THIS STINKIN' LAW!!!



  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    The change is to require photo identification, although school ID or employer ID seems a bit hazy. If they are going to go that route I would have liked to see only photo ID that contains the votere's residence address as being acceptable. I understand that such would create a hassle for folks wanting to use their military ID or othersin a similar circumstance.

    IF they are going to finally get serious about cracking down on voter fraud they should simply require the new photo voter ID cards. Based on other parts of the legislation the Registrar could verify the address based on DL info and access the DL photo to use for the voter ID card. That would mean that 99.9+% of voters (who have DLs or non-driving ID cards) would simply get a new voter ID in the mail. The <.1% that would have to haul their butts to a DMV to get a DL/ID probably need one anyhoow, and if it is too much trouble then that's just too bad - if you want something badly enough you find a way to make it happen. (No, I am not suggesting they carjack some old granny on the way home from choir practice so they have a ride to the DMV!)

    These are the comments (less the jacking of grannies) I am going to sshare with the governor.

    stay safe.

    I urge you to VETO SB 1256 in its current form.
    SB 1256 calls for the elimination of several forms of identification currently accepted as proof of residence and qualification to vote, along with the creation of a photo voter registration card.
    If the Commonwealth is going to get serious about stopping voter fraud it ought to go strictly with the photo voter registration card. 99+% of voters already have a drivers licence or non-driving ID issued by the DMV, or some other state-issued photo ID with the picture tied in to the DMV system. The Registrar of Voters would only need to verify the residence address with the DMV record, upload the photo and mail the created pohot voter reistration card to the voter. The small number of voters who would need to get to a DMV office to have their picture taken should, with minimal effort, arrange for transportation to a DMV office.Additionally, the DMV has moblie offices it could dispatch to locations where it is believed significant numbers of voters without a current DMV photo ID reside.
    If the plan is to require a photo voter registration card I would OPPOSE its use for identification for any other reason. I also OPPOSE access to my voter registration status by any agency except the Registrar of Voters. My status as a registered voter should only be a matter between me and the Registrar of Voters. Neither the police nor a bank teller have any business accessing that information.
    Please inform me of what action you intend to take regarding SB 1256.
    Last edited by skidmark; 02-24-2013 at 10:56 AM. Reason: comments dropped on original posting
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    The change is to require photo identification, although school ID or employer ID seems a bit hazy. If they are going to go that route I would have liked to see only photo ID that contains the votere's residence address as being acceptable. I understand that such would create a hassle for folks wanting to use their military ID or othersin a similar circumstance.

    IF they are going to finally get serious about cracking down on voter fraud they should simply require the new photo voter ID cards. Based on other parts of the legislation the Registrar could verify the address based on DL info and access the DL photo to use for the voter ID card. That would mean that 99.9+% of voters (who have DLs or non-driving ID cards) would simply get a new voter ID in the mail. The <.1% that would have to haul their butts to a DMV to get a DL/ID probably need one anyhoow, and if it is too much trouble then that's just too bad - if you want something badly enough you find a way to make it happen. (No, I am not suggesting they carjack some old granny on the way home from choir practice so they have a ride to the DMV!)

    These are the comments (less the jacking of grannies) I am going to sshare with the governor.

    stay safe.
    I doubt that it is as high as 99.9%. And unfortunately, granny is more likely than most of us whipper-snappers to be among those without ID. She may not want to go all the way down to the Government Center to get a new "picture voter ID", and her social security card won't work anymore. Seems to me, making her drive to the Government Center is kind of like a poll tax. We were supposed to have gotten rid of those.

    But then again, she probably shouldn't be driving, and probably also doesn't have a CHP. If she is driving, I am kind of on the fence about what she should do about the carjacker:

    Pulling her handgun might be dangerous for both parties, and probably would at minimum dampen the enthusiasm of our putative pro-2A carjacking voter.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Look, I am basically against the elimination of all of the alternate forms of ID, but IF they are going to get serious about voter fraud then the photo voter registration card is probably the best way to address it.

    While I have nothing to back up this SWAG, I'm goping to the very end of the proverbial limb to make it: 99.9% of CHP holders will be PO at no longer being able to show their pasteboard permission slip, but that's about it. They all had some form of government photo ID they used to get it, did't they?

    To keep some illegal sanctuary-seeking wanna-be citizenship-wishing dreamer from diluting my franchise I am willing to accept photo voter registration cards - so long as that is the only use of them that is allowed. Sort of like the Social Security card - NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES (except for voting).

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  5. #5
    Regular Member scouser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    1,232
    I'll add this to what skid said,

    I'd be PO'd at having to have a photo on my CHP when we have only recently managed to have the fingerprint requirement removed for certain localities in this state. If voting requires a photo ID then show the photo ID that you're required to carry with your CHP to show on demand to law enforcement when carrying concealed. DON'T go inviting further requirements for obtaining a CHP, I'm happy that mine is just a flimsy piece of card and that's how I want it to remain.

  6. #6
    Regular Member scouser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    I doubt that it is as high as 99.9%. And unfortunately, granny is more likely than most of us whipper-snappers to be among those without ID. She may not want to go all the way down to the Government Center to get a new "picture voter ID", and her social security card won't work anymore. Seems to me, making her drive to the Government Center is kind of like a poll tax. We were supposed to have gotten rid of those.

    But then again, she probably shouldn't be driving, and probably also doesn't have a CHP. If she is driving, I am kind of on the fence about what she should do about the carjacker:

    Pulling her handgun might be dangerous for both parties, and probably would at minimum dampen the enthusiasm of our putative pro-2A carjacking voter.
    On a technicality here,

    If granny has to drive to DMV to get a picture voter ID, then she could instead just use her drivers licence for the photo ID. To be car jacked on her way there she'd have to be driving, which requires a drivers licence, which would work for photo ID, so she wouldn't be driving to get an unnecessary one and wouldn't get car jacked on her way there.
    Last edited by scouser; 02-24-2013 at 11:31 AM.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by scouser View Post
    On a technicality here,

    If granny has to drive to DMV to get a picture voter ID, then she could instead just use her drivers licence for the photo ID. To be car jacked on her way there she'd have to be driving, which requires a drivers licence, which would work for photo ID, so she wouldn't be driving to get an unnecessary one and wouldn't get car jacked on her way there.
    Granny's drivers license expired in 1993, and she has forgotten to renew it ever since.

    And when she really has to step on it to make it to her Canasta game, that nice young man in blue just tells her to slow it down a bit: she reminds him of his grandma too!

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    Granny's drivers license expired in 1993, and she has forgotten to renew it ever since.

    And when she really has to step on it to make it to her Canasta game, that nice young man in blue just tells her to slow it down a bit: she reminds him of his grandma too!
    Granny's photo is still in the DMV system. The Registrar of Voters can upload it and mail her a new voter registration card.

    And again, reading comprehension is your friend. Granny was NOT driving to the DMV to get a voter registration card photo made - she was coming home from choir practice. The your urban chauffeur wanna-be was the one wanting to go to the DMV to get a photo voter registration card.

    Keep it straight, will ya?

    And I agree with Scouser - we already showed ID to get the CHP. Leave it the &#%$ alone.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    519
    One person, one vote is a good and fundamental concept. Unfortunately, the technology of voter fraud has gone far beyond the crude practice of having people vote multiple times. That takes quite a bit of effort and involves a potentially large number of people, some of whom might rat out the scheme or get caught in some manner. Completely unnecessary with electronic voting. All you have to do is compromise the software that counts the votes and program the vote counting to switch a percentage of votes to the favored candidate. Few people have sufficient knowledge to even know if fraud is going on at all. Even a software expert is likely to have a difficult to impossible job identifying compromised software.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Look, I am basically against the elimination of all of the alternate forms of ID, but IF they are going to get serious about voter fraud then the photo voter registration card is probably the best way to address it.

    While I have nothing to back up this SWAG, I'm goping to the very end of the proverbial limb to make it: 99.9% of CHP holders will be PO at no longer being able to show their pasteboard permission slip, but that's about it. They all had some form of government photo ID they used to get it, did't they?

    To keep some illegal sanctuary-seeking wanna-be citizenship-wishing dreamer from diluting my franchise I am willing to accept photo voter registration cards - so long as that is the only use of them that is allowed. Sort of like the Social Security card - NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES (except for voting).

    stay safe.
    Kinda depends on how you look at it Skid: no doubt there is some "illegal sanctuary-seeking wanna-be citizenship-wishing dreamer" somewhere out there just waiting to dilute the vote of somebody like you.

    But this guy is going to have to be pretty resourceful, diligent and lucky to pull this off: he is going to have to creatively identify some other guy in the precinct to impersonate who is both registered to vote and about his same age. Then, he is going to have to forge
    some non-picture ID with this guy's name on it, show up at 6:00 AM (he would not want to show up after they guy he is passing himself off as has already voted). He is also hoping that this guy's neighbors, who are standing in line with him, working as election officers behind the voter check-in table, and as party poll-watchers behind the election officers, are not going to realize that he is an imposter the moment he says his assumed name.

    IMHO, changing the voter ID requirement again this year is much more likely to affect the folks who jog to the polls, or roll up with their strollers, and don't have picture ID because some flimsy piece of cardboard (usually a voter registration card, but certainly sometimes a social security card or CHP) worked just fine last year. After waiting in line only to be told that they cannot vote a regular ballot without going all the way back home again and returning with photo ID, they are most likely to just leave and forget about it.

    The jogger guy, stroller lady, and illegal wanna be dreamer dude are all in the same boat: chances are almost certain that their one vote is not going to make a whit of difference, so if it is a pain, why go to the trouble? Voting is, for the most part, an irrational act.

    There are probably some very few recent bona fide cases of "false identity" voter fraud out there, but it has been way overblown. One of the guys who has made something of a career over-blowing it, Hans von Spakovsky, just lost his position on Fairfax County's Board of Elections because he cried wolf about this too many times, and in October, got his lying self exposed on these issues by a journalist in the New Yorker.

    So if it is worth it to you to complicate and sometimes effectively prevent the exercise of the franchise by granny, jogger man, stroller lady and hundreds like them, to prevent the vote of that one illegal dreamer dude who irks you, then something like this "photo voter ID" bill may be for you.

    But I was prevented from completing my purchase of a six pack of Shock-Top last night because I accidentally left my drivers' license in some unknown shirt. So this bill is definitely not for me.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post


    The new voter ID law would eliminate concealed carry permits as valid voter ID:

    http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp...131+ful+SB1256

    Governor McDonnell could line item veto this part of the law, or veto the law entirely.

    E-mail him:

    http://www.governor.virginia.gov/Abo...ctGovernor.cfm

    Or call him:

    Phone Numbers:

    Office: (804) 786-2211
    Fax: (804) 371-6351
    TTY/TDD (For the deaf or hard-of-hearing):
    1-800-828-1120, or 711


    Tell him: WE DON'T NEED THIS STINKIN' LAW!!!


    This seriously made me laugh out loud.

    Your completely transparent attempt to "tug at the heart-strings" of the gun folks to protest the new Voter ID law is laughable.

    Thanks, I always appreciate a good chuckle.

    TFred

  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    I don't have a dog in this fight either.....but I may remove myself from the voter rolls over the ID part.


  13. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    This seriously made me laugh out loud.

    Your completely transparent attempt to "tug at the heart-strings" of the gun folks to protest the new Voter ID law is laughable.

    Thanks, I always appreciate a good chuckle.

    TFred
    Of course, Fred, as you know, I am one of the "gun folks." And, as you know from long experience with me, or hopefully have guessed by now, I am -- transparently -- also against this new voter ID law; a civil libertarian, a true blue Democrat, and I don't see anything contradictory about any of that.



    But I am always pleased to give you a chuckle.

  14. #14
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    Of course, Fred, as you know, I am one of the "gun folks." [Yes.] And, as you know from long experience with me, or hopefully have guessed by now, I am -- transparently -- also against this new voter ID law [Would be disappointed if you were not.]; a civil libertarian [Not sure that is possible with a "D" label, but I won't argue.], a true blue Democrat [Yes.], and I don't see anything contradictory about any of that.

    But I am always pleased to give you a chuckle. [Always appreciated!]
    See answers in-line above.

    What I will say is that I firmly believe that a fraudulent vote does FAR more damage to society than an illegally owned firearm, especially in this time of major state offices being decided by under 100 votes, and major party figures telling the world how to vote illegally.

    Reeves defeated Houck by 86 votes and that one fact is probably what allowed us to FINALLY close the books on CHP information being open to the public. Houck probably never would have let even the original bill out of the CoJ committee, he was NOTORIOUS for being a nosy neighbor, and a very big friend of the news media.

    TFred

  15. #15
    Regular Member optiksguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Town of Herndon, VA
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    What I will say is that I firmly believe that a fraudulent vote does FAR more damage to society than an illegally owned firearm
    If voting is one of the bedrock principles of representative government, vote fraud should be harshly punished. I'd prefer multiple year prison sentences.
    Last edited by optiksguy; 02-24-2013 at 11:15 PM. Reason: Forgot to quote

  16. #16
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by optiksguy View Post
    If voting is one of the bedrock principles of representative government, vote fraud should be harshly punished. I'd prefer multiple year prison sentences.
    The fact that it does not, belies the current state of irrelevance that the people hold for their legislators. Years of apparent disregard for the will of the people have given those people a spirit of utter apathy about the legislative process, and look where that has led us today.

    Very sad.

    TFred

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    ....

    IMHO, changing the voter ID requirement again this year is much more likely to affect the folks who jog to the polls, or roll up with their strollers, and don't have picture ID because some flimsy piece of cardboard (usually a voter registration card, but certainly sometimes a social security card or CHP) worked just fine last year. After waiting in line only to be told that they cannot vote a regular ballot without going all the way back home again and returning with photo ID, they are most likely to just leave and forget about it.

    The jogger guy, stroller lady, and illegal wanna be dreamer dude are all in the same boat: chances are almost certain that their one vote is not going to make a whit of difference, so if it is a pain, why go to the trouble? Voting is, for the most part, an irrational act.

    There are probably some very few recent bona fide cases of "false identity" voter fraud out there, but it has been way overblown. One of the guys who has made something of a career over-blowing it, Hans von Spakovsky, just lost his position on Fairfax County's Board of Elections because he cried wolf about this too many times, and in October, got his lying self exposed on these issues by a journalist in the New Yorker.

    So if it is worth it to you to complicate and sometimes effectively prevent the exercise of the franchise by granny, jogger man, stroller lady and hundreds like them, to prevent the vote of that one illegal dreamer dude who irks you, then something like this "photo voter ID" bill may be for you.

    But I was prevented from completing my purchase of a six pack of Shock-Top last night because I accidentally left my drivers' license in some unknown shirt. So this bill is definitely not for me.
    Reading comprehension, once again, is your friend. SB1256 has provisions for a registered voter who does not have photo ID to cast a "provisional" ballot - one that gets cross-checked and if it passes gets counted just like all the others.

    What your not having your DL so you could buy beer has to do with SB1256 is beyond me.

    Your great concern for the exercise of the franchise by granny, jogger man, stroller lady and hundreds like them, over any desire I might have to prevent the vote of that one illegal dreamer dude who irks me, is touching. It might be meaningful if it were not for the fact that nothing I have posted would prevent any of them from casting a vote. You may have one more try at knocking me down. Use it wisely.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    I don't have a dog in this fight either.....but I may remove myself from the voter rolls over the ID part.
    I thought you did that over something else years ago. Might have been the quality of the candidates?

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    See answers in-line above.

    What I will say is that I firmly believe that a fraudulent vote does FAR more damage to society than an illegally owned firearm, especially in this time of major state offices being decided by under 100 votes, and major party figures telling the world how to vote illegally.

    Reeves defeated Houck by 86 votes and that one fact is probably what allowed us to FINALLY close the books on CHP information being open to the public. Houck probably never would have let even the original bill out of the CoJ committee, he was NOTORIOUS for being a nosy neighbor, and a very big friend of the news media.

    TFred
    Yup, I must agree that Sen. Houck did some constitutionally edgy stuff with respect to privacy and 1st Amend. issues, and not only regarding CHP holders:

    http://landrecs.com/privacy-and-publ...han-you-think/

    On the other hand, Sen. Reeves is no great champion of one person, one vote:

    http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2...1507?rss=local

    Reeves' thinking on issues like this concerns me greatly. But even while recognizing that 86 seats was very close when the control of the Senate was at stake, my fellow Democrats and I are not wasting our time out yammering on about the potential for fraud in this "Republican run race" for years like some of your tinfoil hat squad conspiratorialist copartisans have been and are about the close race between Al Franken and Norm Coleman. Politically, we realize that there is nothing to be gained from it.

    If I were a Republican, I would want to consign these factually challenged theories about voter identity fraud to the dustbin as fast as possible. Otherwise, Republican "true believers" will force Republican lawmakers to pass even more legislation that appears to make voting more difficult for democratic constituencies. That is almost as good an issue for Democrats as trans-vaginal ultrasound was last year for getting our people to the polls. In 2013 -- like 2012 -- I'd bet if McDonnell passes this, it means far more votes for Ds than the idiot voter ID legislation will likely suppress.

    So, if I were thinking purely in partisan terms, my private attitude about this new voter ID law would be: "go ahead, make my day." And I certainly would not be blogging about this law.

    But then again, there is no reason for you to believe any of this. After all, I am a Democrat.


  20. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Reading comprehension, once again, is your friend. SB1256 has provisions for a registered voter who does not have photo ID to cast a "provisional" ballot - one that gets cross-checked and if it passes gets counted just like all the others.

    What your not having your DL so you could buy beer has to do with SB1256 is beyond me.

    Your great concern for the exercise of the franchise by granny, jogger man, stroller lady and hundreds like them, over any desire I might have to prevent the vote of that one illegal dreamer dude who irks me, is touching. It might be meaningful if it were not for the fact that nothing I have posted would prevent any of them from casting a vote. You may have one more try at knocking me down. Use it wisely.

    stay safe.
    As of last year, under Virginia law, "no ID" provisional ballots are counted only if the voters get his/her IDs into the registrar's office by noon on the third day following the election. Lots of voters who showed up on election day in 2012 and had to vote provisionally did not bother.

    Some Virginia county election boards refused to count provisional ballots even if ID was provided if there was some immaterial defect in how the form on the provisional ballot envelope was filled out. For example, some provisional ballots were not counted because the election officer at the precinct where the provisional ballot was cast forgot to sign the envelope -- a mistake which happened many times. Other ballots might not be counted if the voter did not provide their middle initial, or only provided the last 4 digits of their SSN. So, for reasons having nothing to do with doubts about these voters' identities or qualifications to vote, these votes, and many others, were lost.

    If I were a truely Machiavellian Democrat, of course, I would be hoping that the votes which are lost would be mostly those of people more like jogger man: he is a libertarian privacy activist who vainly hoped to vote with his CHP based on his experience in 2012, and does not like providing his SSN. Also, he is a guy, so, I would guess, he is much more likely to vote for Cuccinelli. I also might not be too worried if Granny left her glasses at home and is having trouble reading the fine print on that provisional ballot envelope because statistically, I might think that old people are somewhat more likely to vote Republican (although, then again, Granny is such a nice lady).

    I might be inclined to do more, on the other hand, to chase stroller lady down so as to help her get back to the polls with her ID,or at least, get it to the Office of Elections for her. She is more likely to have strong feelings about Cooch's showdown last year over the regulation of abortion clinics, and may be concerned about his ideological stands against the health care law, the environment, and science. She has a kid to worry about, after all.

    But then again, if we are talking about a Republican leaning precinct down where you live -- well, perhaps my Democratic ID chase efforts are better spent up in a precinct in Arlington with 80% democratic performance. Why should I help you get YOUR votes to be counted, after all?

    Now do you see the problem here?

  21. #21
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    I thought you did that over something else years ago. Might have been the quality of the candidates?

    stay safe.
    I did it over the first time they changed the ID laws.
    Re-registered in time for the next election.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171

    OMG, There is a Democrat on here??????

    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    Yup, I must agree that Sen. Houck did some constitutionally edgy stuff with respect to privacy and 1st Amend. issues, and not only regarding CHP holders:

    http://landrecs.com/privacy-and-publ...han-you-think/

    On the other hand, Sen. Reeves is no great champion of one person, one vote:

    http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2...1507?rss=local

    Reeves' thinking on issues like this concerns me greatly. But even while recognizing that 86 seats was very close when the control of the Senate was at stake, my fellow Democrats and I are not wasting our time out yammering on about the potential for fraud in this "Republican run race" for years like some of your tinfoil hat squad conspiratorialist copartisans have been and are about the close race between Al Franken and Norm Coleman. Politically, we realize that there is nothing to be gained from it.

    If I were a Republican, I would want to consign these factually challenged theories about voter identity fraud to the dustbin as fast as possible. Otherwise, Republican "true believers" will force Republican lawmakers to pass even more legislation that appears to make voting more difficult for democratic constituencies. That is almost as good an issue for Democrats as trans-vaginal ultrasound was last year for getting our people to the polls. In 2013 -- like 2012 -- I'd bet if McDonnell passes this, it means far more votes for Ds than the idiot voter ID legislation will likely suppress.

    So, if I were thinking purely in partisan terms, my private attitude about this new voter ID law would be: "go ahead, make my day." And I certainly would not be blogging about this law.

    But then again, there is no reason for you to believe any of this. After all, I am a Democrat.

    Even though you are a ^%$&crat (Just kidding), I have found that not all of them are bad. I have a buddy that is a hard core Democrat and we argue politics and then go have a beer or a cup of coffee and laugh. My oldest daughter claims to be an "independent" yet has never voted for a Republican in her 12 years of voting. Democrat, Republican, Baptist, Catholic, are all choices and protected by our Constitution.

    As to the picture ID, I thought the bill had funding for the registrars to produce the IDs. DCJS and DMV have been using the same picture for my license and ID cards since 2000.

    I don't really see the problem getting an ID, but more importantly, why do we need the permission of the feds to change our laws? This is 2013 and about time they got out of our business. The discrimination and prejudice problems are far worse in up northj in the “Blue states” than in Virginia.
    Last edited by va_tazdad; 02-25-2013 at 06:36 AM. Reason: fat finger typos

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post


    The new voter ID law would eliminate concealed carry permits as valid voter ID:

    http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp...131+ful+SB1256

    Governor McDonnell could line item veto this part of the law, or veto the law entirely.

    E-mail him:

    http://www.governor.virginia.gov/Abo...ctGovernor.cfm

    Or call him:

    Phone Numbers:

    Office: (804) 786-2211
    Fax: (804) 371-6351
    TTY/TDD (For the deaf or hard-of-hearing):
    1-800-828-1120, or 711


    Tell him: WE DON'T NEED THIS STINKIN' LAW!!!


    I have no problem with removing a CHP as a valid ID document. After all, under 18.2-308, you are required to carry a photo ID when you are using your CHP, so anyone who has a CHP is extremely likely to already have a valid photo ID, and keep it with their CHP. My CHP even says so explicitly:
    Permit to Carry a Concealed Handgun
    (Must be carried with proper photo ID)
    As a result of that requirement, what is the problem with removing the CHP as an option?

    (As a toss out to peter, doesn't that simply remove a P4P, too? )
    Alma 43:47 - "And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed...."
    Self defense isn't just a good idea, it's a commandment.

  24. #24
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by grylnsmn View Post

    (As a toss out to peter, doesn't that simply remove a P4P, too? )
    It does but it doesn't really give them any perks, they just get to use it for ID. They can use it for toilet paper for all I care.

    The ID part is what gets me.
    I was extremely proud when Va opted out of REAL ID.
    I'm not so proud that we are slipping into it.

    I'm goingto buy a pack of EZWiders and when they want to see my papers, I'll show them.

    Last edited by peter nap; 02-25-2013 at 08:28 AM.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    . . .
    The ID part is what gets me.
    I was extremely proud when Va opted out of REAL ID.
    I'm not so proud that we are slipping into it.

    I'm going to buy a pack of EZWiders and when they want to see my papers, I'll show them.

    "One of the more obvious questions that The Daily Caller's exclusive "some stuff someone heard about a grade-point average" story immediately raised was, "Is it true that the honorary degree that Barack Obama received from the University of Michigan was printed on rolling papers?" This is a subject that has been the source of much speculation, for many hours. But we need wonder no longer.


    Seven sources who have email accounts and know how to type words have contacted The Huffington Post Friday to independently confirm that the honorary degree that Obama received from the University of Michigan was totally printed on rolling papers. We have agreed to protect the anonymity of these sources, as each has expressed a certain amount of fear for their livelihoods, should they become known as the sources for this story. We feel, however, that their accounts, which corroborate one another, are reliable enough to go ahead and write a blog post about this.


    Naturally, these accounts are contradicted by the evidence -- by which I mean, the lack thereof. Obama has thus far refused to release his honorary degree from the University of Michigan to confirm whether it was printed on rolling papers, or if the degree, once obtained, was utilized as an enclosure for -- as it's known on the streets -- "dat sticky-icky." In refusing to release the degree, the White House has fallen back on the excuse, "Well, this is actually the first time we have ever been asked about this." But, remember, Barack Obama promised to make his administration the "most transparent White House in history."


    To use the parlance of The New York Times, a portrait emerges, of a president who is all too willing to just receive, into his hands, an honorary degree from the University of Michigan that is printed on rolling papers. Given the fact that Obama's fondness for what the kids call "the chronic," is well documented, it would not be unfair to speculate that the president has already used the honorary degree to roll what are commonly referred to as "blunts." It is possible -- indeed, even likely -- that the president took some of these "blunts" to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, to "smoke up" with the jobs numbers wonks ahead of the past few months' positive jobs reports. That could mean that the glowing reports feature statistics that were both figuratively and literally "baked to perfection.""

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2068044.html




    But I digress.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •